Transcript Dating violence among adolescents

Dating violence among
adolescents
Dr Erica Bowen, Matt Mawer, and
Emma Holdsworth
Defining violence
Physical
Threats
Sexual
Psycho –
emotional
Saltzman et al. (2002)
Physical violence
Intentional use of physical force with
the potential for causing death, disability,
injury, or harm.
Examples: slapping, grabbing, choking,
punching, burning, restraining, biting
Sexual violence
Intentional, unwanted sexual touching
or intentional touching of a person of
diminished capacity
Examples: groping, pressuring, getting
partner drunk/drugged
Psychological/emotional violence
Psychological trauma to the victim
caused by acts, threats of acts, or
coercive tactics.
Examples: humiliating, controlling,
withholding money, isolating, shaming
Threats of violence
Using words, gestures, or weapons to
communicate the intent to cause
death, disability, injury, or physical harm.
Examples: threats of any type of
violence (including through social media)
Definition problems
1. Are these standard definitions?
2. How do we separate “threats”?
3. Sub-hierarchies of violence
4. Who defines behaviour as abuse?
Prevalence
Approx.
25%
“The prevention and reduction of youth
dating violence has become an issue of
national
urgency"
Boys
Girls
(Antle et al. 2007; 173)
– 44%
14% – 43%
6 teenagers
in a class15%
of 25
students
Risk factors for dating violence
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Parental influence
Peer influence
General delinquency
Substance abuse
Psychological adjustment & competencies
Attitudes towards violence
Nature of relationship & dating behaviour
Being a victim of dating violence
Parental influence
•
•
•
•
•
Perception of lesser parental involvement
Witnessing inter-parental aggression
Being a victim of parental aggression
Directing aggression towards parents
Perception of parental support for
aggressive solutions
Parental influence
• Perception of lesser parental involvement
– Perceived lack of authority OR
– Lack of exposure to good relationships models,
emotional support & stability
– OR BOTH
Parental influence
• Witnessing inter-parental violence
– Modelling the behaviour - social cognitive model
of violence
– Threat to self and self blame
– Ineffective coping
Parental influence
• Being a victim of parental aggression
– Problems controlling behaviour
– Problems recognising bad behaviours
– Developmental traumatology
• Childhood abuse = historic risk factor
• Trauma symptoms = changeable risk factor
Developmental traumatology
Childhood
abuse
(historic)
Trauma
symptoms
(changeable)
Stress-induced
neurobiological
changes
Dating
violence
Peer influence
•
•
•
•
Friends with experience of dating violence
Friends who perpetrate dating violence
Friends who use aggression generally
Friends who are victims of dating violence
Peer influence
• Friends with experience of dating violence
– Interdependence theory
– Parents become less important as social
relationships become more important
• Friends’ perpetration of dating violence
– Socially acceptable dating behaviour norms
Peer influence
• Friends who use aggression generally
– Social groups not too diverse
– Group norms unchallenged
• Friends who are victims of dating violence
– Longitudinal predictor (girls only)
– Social groups include perpetrators and victims
Summary
• Parental influence
– Perception of lesser involvement = less
authority & less emotional support
– Witnessing inter-parental aggression =
modelling behaviour & ineffective coping
– Victim of parental aggression = trauma
symptoms (proximal risk for violence)
Summary
• Peer influence
– Adolescents susceptible to influences of peer
behaviour
– Socially acceptable dating norms
– Cohesive groups mean norms remains
unchallenged
– Social groups can include perpetrators AND
victims
Intervention programmes
Study Programme evaluated
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Love U2: Increasing your relationship smarts
Love U2: Communication smart
Expect Respect Programme Support Group
Safe Dates
Connections: Relationships and Marriage
Interaction curricula and Law and Justice curricula
Reaching and Teaching Teens to Stop Violence
The Youth relationships project
Results
Behavioural
Attitudinal
Personal /
skills
Other issues
1. Interventions can have negative effects
• Provoke behaviour
• Negative peer influence
2. Do group interventions work?
• Evidence mixed
• Supportive; but enabling?
Conclusions
1. “The
Fourprevention
dimensions
of
violence
and reduction of youth
issue of
2. dating
6 in a violence
class ofhas
25 become
studentsan(25%)
national urgency"
3. Main risks factors: parental
and
peer
(Antle et al.
2007;
173)
4. Interventions: behavioural change
5. But: Lack of European data!
We want to answer
your questions!
References: http://www.cavaproject.eu/
Erica Bowen
[email protected]
Matt Mawer
[email protected]
Emma Holdsworth [email protected]